Pt Tugu Pratama Indonesia v. Citibank N.A.

HCCL 1/2007

[2019] HKCFI 95

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE

HONG KONG SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE REGION

COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE

COMMERCIAL ACTION NO 1 OF 2007

____________

____________

Before: Hon Anthony Chan J in Court

Dates of Hearing: 29-31 August, 3-4 and 7 September 2018

Date of Defendant’s Written Submissions: 19 November 2018

Date of Plaintiff’s Written Submissions: 30 November 2018

Date of Decision: 11 January 2019

__________________

D E C I S I O N

__________________

1.In the judgment dated 12 October 2018, this action was dismissed with costs to the Defendant. However, no provision was made for a certificate for 2 counsel. The Defendant had promptly applied to the court for clarification of the matter. This issue is now before the court for paper disposal after the parties had failed to come to an agreement.

2.Regrettably, the absence of a certificate for 2 counsel was a matter of omission by the court.  With respect to the arguments advanced by the Plaintiff, it is plain from the judgment that this case involved complex issues of law, a large claim by the Plaintiff against a well-known bank and the Plaintiff was represented by senior and junior counsel at the trial.  The can be little doubt that a certificate was justified.

3.I am also satisfied that the “slip rule” under O.20, r.11 can be invoked to remedy the omission.  Accordingly, I grant a certificate for 2 counsel. The costs of and occasioned by this application should be borne by the Plaintiff, and I make an order nisi to that effect.

Holman Fenwick Willan, for the Plaintiff

Mr John Hui, instructed by Clifford Chance, for the Defendant